I have a report that I am trying to migrate from tableau to looker. I do have fixed fields like below on my report. Is there a way to create this statement on looker without using derived table? Otherwise it is gong to be really complicated on Views once we migrate all our reports.
{ FIXED [Employee Id]:MAX( IF NOT ISNULL([Taşıyıcı end date]) THEN [Taşıyıcı end date] END)}
Is there a way to create this statement on looker without using derived table?
Unfortunately no - the only solution is derived table (as you mentioned).
Related
I was adding new Menu functions to Responsibility and then i updated wrong one. But not sure if it is updated now or it was there before.
So, I am searching for a query to find when a certain menu function is added to the certain responsibility.
Please help me.
If you have SQL query access, the who columns (audit columns) are a good place to start looking - check out the LAST_UPDATE_DATE for the date the modification was made and LAST_UPDATED_BY will tell you who updated the table. All the tables should have them. The tables involved are:
fnd_menu
fnd_menu_entry
fnd_nodes
fnd_user_resp_groups
fnd_resp_function
fnd_responsibility
I have created a report using FastReport Designer (Delphi 2010). I have one TfrxIBXQuery (Query1) connected with main database -Base1(frxIBXComponents.DefaultDatabase:=Base1). It works fine, I can get data using Query1+MasterData band.
The problem arises when I'm trying to get data from another database in the same report.
In Designer I drop new frxIBXDatabase (Base2), set the necessary properties. Add new TfrxIBXQuery (Query2) and connect it with Base2.
But I can't get any data from Query2 because it does not see Base2.
How do I solve this problem?
When you look at the properties tab from your query component, can you see any FieldAliases?
If not, you should check the SQL, FastReport can be really picky when it comes to parameters.
Try changing parameter names and see if that works.
If you want to use two or more databases inside report - you should use two TfrxIBXDatabase inside report (on the Data tab)
Clear frxIBXComponents.DefaultDatabase property
I am actually after some ideas to how to address my problem below:
I have TCRTBGrid that users can move columns around and change the width. I want to save the setting in a database. I guess I can do this bit by using
Columns.LoadFromStream and Columns.SaveToStream
then store data in a blob field - Q: Can I store in a longtext field ?
but the biggest problem is that if new columns were added during design time after saving the column settings i want to append these new columns to the end.
Any suggestions ?
Thanks.
I did what Ravaut123 suggested and worked !!!!!!
Once retrieved the user setting , compared it with design grid manually for new and deleted fields 'cause that is only way I could think of.
Anyway thank you to both Ravaut123 and kobik.
I'm using a TClientDataSet as a local dataset without the provider concept. After working with it a method is called that should generate the corresponding SQL statements using the StatusFilter to resolve the changes (generate SQL basically).
This looked easy initially after reading documentation (set StatusFilter to [dsInsert], process all inserts SQL, set StatusFilter to [dsModified] process all updates, the same with deletes) but after a few tests now looks far from trivial, for example:
If I add a record, then edit it: setting the StatusFilter to [dsInserted] displays it, but with the original data.
If I add a record, then edit, then delete it: the record appears with StatusFilter set to [dsInserted] and [dsModified] also.
And other similar situations..
1) I know that if first I process all inserts, then all updates then all deletes the database will be updated in the correct state but it looks far from right this approach (generating useless sql statements).
2) I've tried to access the PRecInfo(ClientDataSet.ActiveBuffer + ClientDataSet.RecordSize).Attribute information (dsRecNew, dsRecOrg, etc.) but still not manage to resolve the logic.
3) I can program the logic to resolve it, for example before processing and insert, set StatusFilter to [dsDeleted], and locating by the primary key if the record to see if its deleted thereafter.. the same with edits, before inserting, checking if the record was updated after so the insert sql in the updated version and so on.. but it should be more easy..
¿Did someone tried to solve this in an elegant and straightforward way? ¿I'm missing something? Thanks
Seems my appreciation for the Entity Framework is taking a serious hit. The "MS almost got it right, but they just missed it because of something L-A-M-E" thought is coming up. Until today everything has been fine. For some unknown reason, it won't compile anymore with Error 2048. I've read up on this and I've seen how you need to map all three operations. Why is this even necessary? What I if I don't need a delete function and only need insert and update? I tried mapping a dummy SP to my delete function. If that fixes my problem, however cheezy, fine. Only problem is, it just created more problems.
Here's what I have. I'm writing a simple newsletter app in MVC. I have entities for a publication, issue and article all generated from my DB (SQL 08). I set up the the relationships in my DB and they translated fine to my EDMX. I made some SPs to insert and update my issues and article. I added them to the EDMX and mapped them accordingly. I don't need a delete function for any of them and I don't need anything for the publication entity. Why is the compiler forcing me to map all functions? IMO, this a MAJOR, MAJOR PROBLEM with EF4 and I can't believe MS would release it with this kind of crap coming up.
The other strange issue is I've tried mapping sp's to entities in another project and configured with only insert and update and they compile fine. Why is the compiler inconsistent?
I would rather not resort to having to use the Imported Functions. Is that my only option? If that's the case it eliminates the ability to the SaveChanges method. Come On MS!!! Fix this!!!!!!!
After much digging and side by side text comparison, I think I have found the solution.
The SP in question was set up like
CREATE PROCEDURE updateArticle
(
#ArticleID INT,
#Content TEXT
)
where it should have been something like
CREATE PROCEDURE updateArticle
(
#ArticleID INT,
#IssueID INT,
#Content TEXT
)
Now, I still don't know why EF4 even requires this since I'm not updating the issueid and the error message lends little help in diagnosing the problem. My SP doesn't even use the IssueID, but EF needs it regardless. Hopefully this will help someone down the road. MS still could do a better job regarding the need for this.